I need a good wide angle lens (and the MF system that goes with it)

[Greg Campbell]

See? :rolleyes: without providing SOME minimal preferences, your question rapidly devolves into a popularity contest.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Another option completely overlooked is the Fujinon 65mm on the Fuji GSW 690 II/III. Nice BIG negative, really wide angle, and quite portable for something that big. You can pick one of those up for a fraction of the cost of the Hassy SuperWide (which would be my other first preference for an extreme wide-angle in medium format).

 

[wclark5179]

I've got a MC ARSAT 30mm f 3.5 for my Mamiya 645 system. I bought the lens off ebay and it was brand new when I purchased it. Maybe check out.

Works really well!

 

[Emil]

See? :rolleyes: without providing SOME minimal preferences, your question rapidly devolves into a popularity contest.

Hey, OP here. I see what you mean, Greg! I'll narrow it down a bit then.

1) format must be rectangular

2) I don't need ultrawide, just a bit wider than the 28mm I usually use on 35mm film.

3) I've nothing against rangefinders, I use them with 35, but the idea of focusing and composing in two different finder windows does not appeal to me, as would be the case with the Mamiyas 6, 7, and press.

and finally, weight and portability/hand-hold-ability do not really matter; for those occasions I use 35mm or even half-frame.

So, what to get then?

Emil

 

[keithwms]

Another option completely overlooked is the Fujinon 65mm on the Fuji GSW 690 II/III.

Mentioned it back in post #11

I've nothing against rangefinders, I use them with 35, but the idea of focusing and composing in two different finder windows does not appeal to me, as would be the case with the Mamiyas 6, 7, and press.

That's not true for the Mamiya 6 and 7 with the 50mm lens. The auxiliary VF is required for the 43mm lens only. And the 50mm lens is "equivalent" to ~25mm, in 35mm terms...

I use the 50mm all the time, it is super sweet and easy to compose with.

 

[Denis R]

polaroid

MP-4 camera system
MP-3 would also work

tominon lenses 17 35 50 75 105 135
intended for copy camera system

28 on 35 ~ 50 on 6x6 ~ 60 on 6x9 ~ 100 on 4x5" -- kodak pro photoguide

http://photo.net/large-format-photography-forum/0034h9

 

[Emil]

OP here again. Thanks for all the suggestions. I've done a lot of (internet) research on all of them. I've really fallen for the Mamiya Press and the 50mm, and also I discovered the Koni-Omega and its 58 or 60mm.

And this got me thinking, how about a Graphic 23 w/ roll film back? What are the choices for wides here?

Emil

 

[photoncatcher]

Right on Jeff. The 50mm 0n my rb is outstanding. The 58mm on my Koni-Omega rapid is also a killer piece of glass. Though, with a FR it takes a little getting used to the auxillery (sp) view finder.

 

[ymc226]

How about the newest version of the Hasselblad 40/4 CFE IF? Heavy but great when mated to a 205FCC or 203FE body.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

How about the newest version of the Hasselblad 40/4 CFE IF? Heavy but great when mated to a 205FCC or 203FE body.

Great system, but definitely NOT within keeping of the OP's desire for wide on a budget.

There are not so many lenses out there for 2 1/4 press cameras in wide angle focal lengths. You could adapt one from something else though.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Hasselblad SWC

 

[keithwms]

I think the O.P. already expressed a preference for composing / focusing TTL...

 

[Emil]

I think the O.P. already expressed a preference for composing / focusing TTL...

I did and now I would like to take that back! It was just old habits talking. I've decided to shop for the Mamiya Press 50mm lens. It seems to be an awesome lens at a good price, and the camera isn't too bad. Thanks everyone!
Emil

 

[keithwms]

Happy shopping and enjoy! And we expect to see some shots soon....

 

[Philippe-Georges]

Biogon 38 mm, be it on Hasselblad, Alpa or an old Linhof, it is still the best wide angle...

Philippe

 

[keithwms]

Well the mamiya lens is widely thought to be a faithful duplicate of the original 10-element biogon design, with better coatings. They simply cannot use the trademarked name.

 

[Q.G.]

I'll readily and happily believe the fact that the 50 mm is also a great lens, perhaps even better than the Biogon.

But that coating thing... Coatings apparently are highly overrated.
Though they do, they don't make much of a difference to begin with.
But the difference between one version of multicoating and another? Zilch. Nada. Nichts. Ingenting. [etcetera]

 

[keithwms]

You think coatings haven't evolved in 50 years?

Remember, the copy is of the original 10 element design, not the 'abbreviated' more recent 8-element one.

So with the mamiya you get the superior original design plus modern coatings.

 

[Q.G.]

You think coatings haven't evolved in 50 years?

Remember, the copy is of the original 10 element design, not the 'abbreviated' more recent 8-element one.

So with the mamiya you get the superior original design plus modern coatings.

I do indeed not believe that coatings have evolved.
They may be more scratch resistant nowadays. But that's it.

And even if: like i said, they don't make much of a difference anyway (comparing uncoated vs coated). A difference between versions of multicoatings may exist on paper. But nowhere else.

You have me puzzled regarding the number of elements. What 10 element original design are you referring to?
(And a by-the-way, so that noone thinks the number of elements is a measure for anything else than how many elements they have used: it's only a measure for how manyelements they have used. Not for how good or bad a lens is).

 

[Q.G.]

Just for laughs, here's an original version of the Biogon lens:

 

[keithwms]

Sorry, I am not going to do your research for you. Waste of my time. There are many, many sites dealing with this. Apparently you have been attempting this argument for many years...

http://photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/00JFAe

 

[Q.G.]

Sorry, I am not going to do your research for you. Waste of my time. There are many, many sites dealing with this. Apparently you have been attempting this argument for many years...

http://photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/00JFAe

No need to do my research for me, Keith, as i have done mine already.
I know the history of that lens rather well.

If anything, it was a waste of your time to research what i have said on the topic elsewhere on the web, without understanding that that shows that i did do my research.

But why so hostile?

 

[keithwms]

why so hostile?

Because you have a long and well documented history of implying what somebody didn't say, and then disagreeing with it.

End of thread for me. The O.P. got the information desired. No point in sullying a nice thread.

If anybody wishes to discuss why some formulas have more elements and coatings, I suggest starting a new thread focused on those topics.

P.S. For further reading, minus the invective... look here.

 

[Q.G.]

If anybody wishes to discuss why some formulas have more elements and coatings, I suggest starting a new thread focused on those topics.

P.S. For further reading, minus the invective... look here.

I agree about the new thread thing.
But - as you say - since the OP already got his answer:

I know that page.
It also says nothing about the 10 element Biogon.

It treats the Biogon as if it is a single lens design/design familiy.
It is not. The Biogon i posted a cross section of is one of the early, 1930s Biogons.
The present day Biogons are nothing like it, not descendants of that line. They are Aviogon derivatives.

The page also attributes the present day 6x6 Biogon to Hans Sauer. Which is also not correct.


How would coatings make one lens better than another? And how would you say have multicoatings evolved so that they do make a difference?

 

[Q.G.]

And (in a separate post, so that it can be deleted without deleting useful info) the invectives in this thread are all yours.
I never implied you said anything you didn't say. I resent your implication that i did.
I also resent your "long document history" slander.
So again: why the hostility?